Women in fantasy

[A. E. Lowan]

Wait, since when is Esmerelda a princess?

You're right about Esmerelda (though she kicks butt), but since when is Tiana? Unless we count Princess-by-marriage, she's a waitress, if I understand correctly (Of course, this accounting takes out most of the Disney Princesses lol). And it was my understanding from historical costuming that if Pocahontas had dressed like that she would have been stoned for immorality.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I also think we need to take the Classic Disney depictions off the table. This stuff dates back DECADES when it was considered a good thing to tranquilize women who were unhappy being housewives. The more modern movies are more fair to debate.

 

[Ireth]

You're right about Esmerelda (though she kicks butt), but since when is Tiana? Unless we count Princess-by-marriage, she's a waitress, if I understand correctly (Of course, this accounting takes out most of the Disney Princesses lol). And it was my understanding from historical costuming that if Pocahontas had dressed like that she would have been stoned for immorality.

Well, Mulan is sometimes included in the princess lineup as well, and she isn't a princess either by birth or marriage. What can ya do?

 

[Mindfire]

You're right about Esmerelda (though she kicks butt), but since when is Tiana? Unless we count Princess-by-marriage, she's a waitress, if I understand correctly (Of course, this accounting takes out most of the Disney Princesses lol).

Princesses by marriage count. But what I meant is that Esmerelda doesn't even appear on the official Disney princesses list.

And it was my understanding from historical costuming that if Pocahontas had dressed like that she would have been stoned for immorality.

By European standards, maybe. But she's not European.

 

[Mindfire]

Well, Mulan is sometimes included in the princess lineup as well, and she isn't a princess either by birth or marriage. What can ya do?

No, but she was given special honor by the emperor of China. That's got to count for something.

 

[Devor]

I'm curious: can you name three differences between Snow White, Aurora, and Cinderella other than their physical appearance and what happens to them in their movies?

Just that two were made in the fifties, while Snow White dates to 1937. That was it for Disney princesses until pretty much the 90s.

Snow White, Aurora and Cinderella are all pretty typical and reasonably positive portrayals for their time. Why anyone cares about them now, fifty-to-eighty years later, goes back to the merchandising.

 

[Chessie]

Princesses by marriage count. But what I meant is that Esmerelda doesn't even appear on the official Disney princesses list.



By European standards, maybe. But she's not European.

Interesting. Some say Pocahontas was around 10 when Smith first met her. And as for Esmeralda, she had it rough in Hugo's novel. She was no princess at all.

 

[Mindfire]

Interesting. Some say Pocahontas was around 10 when Smith first met her. And as for Esmeralda, she had it rough in Hugo's novel. She was no princess at all.

Again, this is Disney, remember? The source material has zero relevance.

 

[Zero Angel]

I wasn't! Were you a 70s or 80s kid by any chance? They say Gen-Xers tended to have less attentive parents.

80s

Just so you're aware, "women's literature" is frequently classified that way for no other reason than that it was written by a woman. You're missing out on a lot.

I'm aware; that's why I put it in quotes. But also, many women write "women's literature" (the bad kind), so I'm still going to be leery. I'm not opposed to reading it, just leery. In fact, I'm less likely to be interested in something written by a woman than one that stars a woman. There's just so much garbage resembling the Lifetime channel or 50 Shades of Grey and all of that CRAP, and for some reason it is lauded as being "fantastic for women".

I'm well aware that this is sexist, but I've been burned too many times. Luckily, it's usually pretty easy to get reviews and recommendations so I get to read authors that are a variety of genders (well, at least two genders).

I agree wholeheartedly with that observation. Seems like in that respect, at least, media targeted at boys does a better job of preparing the audience for life's unending tedium and disappointment.

I don't think stoicism is a good thing in general. Speaking personally, I was pretty sure my dad hated me for about 20 years of my life because he never showed emotion. Elsewise, I'm much more enthused by enthusiasm and emotion. Stoicism is a relatively recent ideal for men, isn't it? I'm fairly certain it was an American thing of the 1900s. Going back to middle ages, men freely cried and showed love/charity for those they cared about (of course, they probably never knew they were going to see them again).

 

[Feo Takahari]

Luckily, it's usually pretty easy to get reviews and recommendations so I get to read authors that are a variety of genders (well, at least two genders).

Agender authors represent! (And bigender, if we've got any. And twinsoul, not that I'm entirely clear what that even means.)

I also think we need to take the Classic Disney depictions off the table. This stuff dates back DECADES when it was considered a good thing to tranquilize women who were unhappy being housewives. The more modern movies are more fair to debate.

I agree with this. As role models go, Aurora's about a step down from Barbie, but some of the recent heroines have been at least decent. (For instance, I don't think Rapunzel was so bad, though admittedly Flynn was more active as a protagonist than she was.)

P.S. Also, correct me if I'm wrong on this--I haven't read 50 Shades--but isn't it the thematic opposite of a Lifetime movie? I can accept them as equally crap, but I'd imagine that someone who loves Lifetime movies would find 50 Shades appalling (and probably vice versa.)

 

[saellys]

I'm aware; that's why I put it in quotes. But also, many women write "women's literature" (the bad kind), so I'm still going to be leery. I'm not opposed to reading it, just leery. In fact, I'm less likely to be interested in something written by a woman than one that stars a woman. There's just so much garbage resembling the Lifetime channel or 50 Shades of Grey and all of that CRAP, and for some reason it is lauded as being "fantastic for women".

I'm well aware that this is sexist, but I've been burned too many times. Luckily, it's usually pretty easy to get reviews and recommendations so I get to read authors that are a variety of genders (well, at least two genders).

Yeah... that's really freaking sexist. Thanks for admitting it, I guess? I've been "burned" by countless male authors who reduce female characters to whores and corpses, or relegate them to the most minor of roles, or tokenize them as part of some dude's story, with equal amounts of crap writing, but it hasn't turned me off of "men's literature" (otherwise known as literature).

I don't think stoicism is a good thing in general. Speaking personally, I was pretty sure my dad hated me for about 20 years of my life because he never showed emotion. Elsewise, I'm much more enthused by enthusiasm and emotion. Stoicism is a relatively recent ideal for men, isn't it? I'm fairly certain it was an American thing of the 1900s. Going back to middle ages, men freely cried and showed love/charity for those they cared about (of course, they probably never knew they were going to see them again).

What I meant by preparing the audience for life was that at the end of a Batman movie, he wins, but he still has problems and there's a sense of the neverending Sisyphusian task of singlehandedly maintaining order and justice. For Disney princesses, their problems have disappeared by the end of the third act.

I can't speak to your generalization about male stoicism, but it kind of sounds like that whole false nostalgia thing to me.

 

[saellys]

Just that two were made in the fifties, while Snow White dates to 1937. That was it for Disney princesses until pretty much the 90s.

Snow White, Aurora and Cinderella are all pretty typical and reasonably positive portrayals for their time. Why anyone cares about them now, fifty-to-eighty years later, goes back to the merchandising.

Precisely why they should not be taken off the table as others have suggested. Young girls are still told they should consider these characters role models. They're arguably the three most popular Disney princesses in the pantheon.

 

[Mindfire]

Precisely why they should not be taken off the table as others have suggested. Young girls are still told they should consider these characters role models. They're arguably the three most popular Disney princesses in the pantheon.

The three most popular? I'd disagree. Cinderella has something of an enduring charm I'll grant you. But the other two fall a lot lower on the list. Aside from Cinderella, I'd say the most popular princesses are the ones that came out during the 90s Disney Renaissance, simply because those are when the most popular Disney movies came out.

 

[Steerpike]

Just doing some quick searching online, it looks like Snow White, Aurora (Sleeping Beauty), and Cinderella all remain among the most popular princesses. One site I saw had Ariel fourth after them. I don't see any hard figures from Disney (sales of merchandise among various princesses).

EDIT: It is worth noting that Disney actively promotes all of the princesses in its Disney Princess line, and in some ways the older, classic princesses are still a cornerstone. Disney Princess merchandise outsells Star Wars merchandise (and that's just the Disney Princess line, not Disney merchandise as a whole). So they're all very popular and well known among girls of today, even the ones that came out in movies long ago.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

What I meant by preparing the audience for life was that at the end of a Batman movie, he wins, but he still has problems and there's a sense of the neverending Sisyphusian task of singlehandedly maintaining order and justice. For Disney princesses, their problems have disappeared by the end of the third act.

I can't speak to your generalization about male stoicism, but it kind of sounds like that whole false nostalgia thing to me.

Jumping away from the Disney princess it isn't the fact that the movie has a female protagonist that makes an automatic happy ending. Take The Emperor's New Groove, Hercules, and Tarzan. All male protagonists, all their problems gone by the end of the third act. Cue the inspirational final theme. (By the way, loved all three of these. We're a Disney household.) What makes this happen is that this is an expected formula from an animated Disney feature. Dinosaur, on the other hand, DID end on a, for a Disney feature, rather stoic note because while the theme of survival of the group vs. survival of the fittest has been addressed and the group has indeed, mostly, survived, their world is still ending and life will never be the same. But, Dinosaur is a very different kind of animated feature (with a very strong female love interest) that actually scared the pee out of little kids during the first 5 minutes.

But, some parents saw "Disney" and didn't pay attention to the PG rating when they brought in their 4-year-olds.

 

[Kit]

Seems like in that respect, at least, media targeted at boys does a better job of preparing the audience for life's unending tedium and disappointment.
.

LOL...... I had to give you rep because you made me snort Dr Pepper out my nose.

 

[Kit]

The whole angle of making girls want to "be" a princess squicks me out. What does it even mean?
.

I think a large part of it is that they just want to wear the frothy, sparkly dress and tiara. Somebody needs to make some cartoons with a kick-ass female superhero who wears a frothy, sparkly dress and tiara.

 

[Steerpike]

My daughter wore a sparkly, frothy princess dress and a tiara for Halloween. Then I put makeup on her and made her into a zombie. The effect on other kids was priceless.

 

[saellys]

Aside from Cinderella, I'd say the most popular princesses are the ones that came out during the 90s Disney Renaissance, simply because those are when the most popular Disney movies came out.

Ariel and Jasmine? I'll grant that Ariel is really popular because what little girl doesn't love to dress up as a mermaid, but I'd put Jasmine near the bottom of the pantheon in terms of how many girls buy her merchandise. (Possibly in part because her costume involves a bare midriff and I don't know a lot of parents who would be cool with that; Disney's official Ariel costumes are modified for tasteful coverage).

Jasmine was one of the most positive depictions in any Disney film, even though she's not in the title; she had a personality and wants of her own, saw through Aladdin's disguise, and flat out told a room full of dudes that she was not there to be married off at their whims. Ended up enslaved by the villain and rescued by the hero, of course, but up until then everything went really well. And still her stuff doesn't sell. She was the go-to Disney princess for young girls who aren't white (if Disney's own promotional photos of girls wearing the Jasmine costume are any indication), at least until Tiana arrived.

Ariel is, in my experience, significantly more popular--a step below the Big Three, as Steerpike pointed out. She has a distinct personality, a thirst for adventure, a neat collection of landlubber stuff, and a couple funny male sidekicks who are unmistakably second fiddle to her, not the other way around. And she makes a compelling mistake in her haste to go see the world.

Then she spends the latter two thirds of her story unable to speak. Every action that contributes toward the resolution of her unfortunate circumstance is accomplished by some other character. She may as well have been in a coma like her princess predecessors.

Point is, even if we bring it forward to the 90s, any agency the princesses have is what gets them into trouble, not out of it.

 

[Ireth]

Then she spends the latter two thirds of her story unable to speak. Every action that contributes toward the resolution of her unfortunate circumstance is accomplished by some other character. She may as well have been in a coma like her princess predecessors.

Well, some would argue that when Ariel can't speak is when her curious personality really shines through -- she explores the human world with reckless abandon, and her communication via body language, gestures and expressions is quite effective (until the whole "you're marrying the wrong woman, Eric!" bit, at least). And she does save Eric's life not once, but twice. How many other Disney princesses have done that?